A former Hillary Clinton staffer who helped set up the former secretary of state's private email server has vowed to invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer questions after a congressional committee subpoenaed him, MSNBC confirmed late Wednesday.

Bryan Pagliano, who worked for Clinton during her 2008 presidential campaign and at the State Department, has been identified in digital records as the person who set up her email server in 2009.

The House Select Committee on Benghazi, which is investigating Clinton's emails, subpoenaed Pagliano last month to testify. But his lawyer said Monday that the IT specialist would refuse to answer questions, asserting his constitutional right against self-incrimination, The Washington Post first reported Wednesday.

Who knows if this is true but some hacker is claiming to have the complete (or at least much of it) server's emails and selling them for $500 million. I'm guessing the bidders might be a political opponent or a tabloid magazine since assuredly Russia, ,Iran, China, Syrian Electronic Army, N.Korea etc have already obtained them prior from the private Clinton server located in the closet.http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/hillary-clinton-hacked-emails-sale/

Surprise, surprise, surprise. United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Amit Priyavadan Mehta, appointed by Obama, born in Patan, India, rules in favor of Obama's State Dept (and Billary effectively) with regard to the emails about the Benghazi attack, cover-up, etc.http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/260044-judge-rules-for-clinton-on-emails

Why has she not been arrested? If a normal person deleted 3000 of their emails before turning over their server to the FBI they would be thrown in prison. This is the most blatant example of the rule of law not applying to the rich and the political elite.

Why has she not been arrested? If a normal person deleted 3000 of their emails before turning over their server to the FBI they would be thrown in prison. This is the most blatant example of the rule of law not applying to the rich and the political elite.

I think you answered your own question. Along that vein imagine the reaction of the IRS, SEC, or other govt agency or regulator if you replied to an audit or investigation that "sorry, all my emails and bank records were deleted." "We've had some server failures."

Another worrying thing, especially in light of the various scandals in the UK over the past few years, why won't any reporter, opponent, etc touch the whole Epstein story and his connections to the rich, famous, or royals (and what about the films/pics he was alleged to have taken secretly?) The famous people in his contract lists and listed as 'guests' on Lolita flights and his party houses? Or that Epstein 'donated' several million to the Clinton Foundation after the investigation into him happened. And why would someone need 21 (!) contacts for a person (they found 21 different contact numbers for Bill Clinton on Epstein's phone.) And how does a school teacher at an elite private school become a billionaire? And why would people still be friends with him post-conviction on a child sex charge?

It's just baffling to me. It really shows just how effective the Party system is at dividing people, when clearly illegal acts are seen as 'attacks from the other side!' instead of the blatant disregard for the letter of the law which is the reality of the situation.

I think you answered your own question. Along that vein imagine the reaction of the IRS, SEC, or other govt agency or regulator if you replied to an audit or investigation that "sorry, all my emails and bank records were deleted." "We've had some server failures."

Another worrying thing, especially in light of the various scandals in the UK over the past few years, why won't any reporter, opponent, etc touch the whole Epstein story and his connections to the rich, famous, or royals (and what about the films/pics he was alleged to have taken secretly?) The famous people in his contract lists and listed as 'guests' on Lolita flights and his party houses? Or that Epstein 'donated' several million to the Clinton Foundation after the investigation into him happened. And why would someone need 21 (!) contacts for a person (they found 21 different contact numbers for Bill Clinton on Epstein's phone.) And how does a school teacher at an elite private school become a billionaire? And why would people still be friends with him post-conviction on a child sex charge?

Why has she not been arrested? If a normal person deleted 3000 of their emails before turning over their server to the FBI they would be thrown in prison. This is the most blatant example of the rule of law not applying to the rich and the political elite.

The investigation is ongoing. I have absolutely no doubt what-so-ever that she will be indicted when the feds have concluded their investigation. Be patient; her time is coming soon.

She's going to walk out of it laughing. How many bodies and rape victims do the Clintons have in their wake? Granted she isn't nearly as charming or intelligent as Bill but I have to think she's going to walk.

She's going to walk out of it laughing. How many bodies and rape victims do the Clintons have in their wake? Granted she isn't nearly as charming or intelligent as Bill but I have to think she's going to walk.

Did I hear correctly, is she supported to have directed a subordinate to downgrade/remove a security classification of classified data/information so it could be sent electronically through unsecure channels?

Did I hear correctly, is she supported to have directed a subordinate to downgrade/remove a security classification of classified data/information so it could be sent electronically through unsecure channels?

Did I hear correctly, is she supported to have directed a subordinate to downgrade/remove a security classification of classified data/information so it could be sent electronically through unsecure channels?

I think you answered your own question. Along that vein imagine the reaction of the IRS, SEC, or other govt agency or regulator if you replied to an audit or investigation that "sorry, all my emails and bank records were deleted." "We've had some server failures."

Another worrying thing, especially in light of the various scandals in the UK over the past few years, why won't any reporter, opponent, etc touch the whole Epstein story and his connections to the rich, famous, or royals (and what about the films/pics he was alleged to have taken secretly?) The famous people in his contract lists and listed as 'guests' on Lolita flights and his party houses? Or that Epstein 'donated' several million to the Clinton Foundation after the investigation into him happened. And why would someone need 21 (!) contacts for a person (they found 21 different contact numbers for Bill Clinton on Epstein's phone.) And how does a school teacher at an elite private school become a billionaire? And why would people still be friends with him post-conviction on a child sex charge?

The alleged part about films/pics isn't alleged anymore. He already went to "jail" for those when one of the kids he lured to his place freaked and went to the cops.

The investigation is ongoing. I have absolutely no doubt what-so-ever that she wi1l be indicted when the feds have concluded their investigation. Be patient; her time is coming soon.

Assuming you and MV are correct, what impact do you expect that to have on her campaign? I read the other day polling showed 55% of registered Democrats likely to vote in the 2016 presidential election have said they will vote for HRC if she is under federal indictment.

Assuming you and MV are correct, what impact do you expect that to have on her campaign? I read the other day polling showed 55% of registered Democrats likely to vote in the 2016 presidential election have said they will vote for HRC if she is under federal indictment.

But she would lose the independents...she would lose the general election by a large margin...

Assuming you and MV are correct, what impact do you expect that to have on her campaign? I read the other day polling showed 55% of registered Democrats likely to vote in the 2016 presidential election have said they will vote for HRC if she is under federal indictment.

I actually think that number is low. I think more like 95% of registered democrats that actually show up to the polls will vote straight party democrat, no matter who's name is on the ballot. I don't personally know any democrats that would consider voting any other way.

I actually think that number is low. I think more like 95% of registered democrats that actually show up to the polls will vote straight party democrat, no matter who's name is on the ballot. I don't personally know any democrats that would consider voting any other way.

That is one of the reasons I am against straight party voting.

I don't know if is that high but it would be high. There is a groundswell at the University (and in other schools around the country) for Bernie but 1) they might not get up in time to vote 2) that is still a small population versus the country. Many will vote "straight party" even if Bill was convicted of rape and pedophilia and Hillary indicted on multiple accounts re emails, the server, Benghazi, private State Dept and kickbacks through the Foundation, instructing others to change/destroy security levels, documents, emails, etc etc. They will, if past history is judge, turn that into a positive in the election- but could hurt in the primaries/caucuses/donations, possibly if there was another viable candidate in the Democratic party.

I'm against straight party voting- and voting in general for many people. I don't like motor voter registration, consolidated elections to single-days, balloting in other languages, and straight party (and so other things.)

what impact do you expect that to have on her campaign? I read the other day polling showed 55% of registered Democrats likely to vote in the 2016 presidential election have said they will vote for HRC if she is under federal indictment.

Actually charging her would only cause her to... double down.

I actually hadn't yet considered if she could still be considered for the nomination if she were shackled to a bench, swathed in bright orange, but if there's a way, she'll find it. She'll run as long as she can, given that she is literally running for her life.

Certainly no Republican would ever have gotten away with "losing" so many emails involved in an investigation, right?

White House on Emails: "We Screwed Up"

By JOEL ROBERTS CBS/AP April 12, 2007, 11:27 AM

The White House admits that some e-mails about the U.S. Attorney firings may have been destroyed and that some staffers may have improperly done official business on Republican Party e-mail accounts, CBS News White House correspondent Jim Axelrod reports.

The claim that e-mails sent on a Republican Party account might have been lost was challenged Thursday by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, who quipped that even his teenage neighbor could find them.

"They say they have not been preserved. I don't believe that!" Leahy shouted from the Senate floor as the dispute over the firing of federal prosecutors continued at a high pitch. "That's like saying the dog ate my homework. It doesn't work that way."

"You can't erase e-mails, not today. They've gone through too many servers," said Leahy, D-Vt. "Those e-mails are there; they just don't want to produce them. We'll subpoena them if necessary."

Separately, Leahy's committee approved — but did not issue — new subpoenas to compel the administration to produce documents and testimony about the firings.

Another 1,000 pages of documents are about to be released by the Justice Department investigators, Axelrod reports.

White House officials insisted the administration is making a genuine effort to recover any missing e-mails that had been sent on an account sponsored by the Republican National Committee.

But while Perino pushed back on questions about the e-mails, she also made an uncommonly candid admission.

"We're being very honest and forthcoming," she added. "I hope that he would understand the spirit in which we have come forward and tried to explain how we screwed up our policy and how we're working to fix it."

The innocent until proven guilty part has nothing to do with being arrested. They arrest people all the time and then decide if they can prove they are guilty.

With standard crimes yes, with these kinds of crimes where it is not yet known if classified information or other information which was not for the general public was released no. Even if it was not a Clinton you still wouldn't be arrested unless the FBI thought you were about to bug out. They need hard proof before such embarrassment is brought down on said agency.